PETA lawsuit seeks to expand animal rights

And even veggies wouldn't last very long without manure for the fields.

No. Obviously not a cannibal, as a cannibal is one that eats flesh of its own kind. I could only be a cannibal if I ate humans.

Do I consider myself a murderer because I eat meat? Not based on the definition of murder, which is "the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought".

Having said that, I am not happy with how I currently get the meat I eat. I have a long way to go before I'll be satisfied that I'm acquiring my meat in a way that has the least impact on the rights of animals. Some of the information I'm picking up at HT will help me move towards that goal.

You will find some good info and people in the Livestock forums, Jonathan. Welcome.

They also want us to call fish "sea kittens" in an attempt to make us view them as something more cuddly and pet-like rather than as food...


Jonathan: I think you confuse "animal rights" and "animal welfare". If you really feel that animals should have human rights then I suggest you read some of the links already posted. You should also google Ingrid Newkirk and Wayne Pacelle. Reading about those two should at least give you food for thought. If you'll excuse the pun.

Raven12: I have never seen anyone on here bullied for being vegetarian or vegan. Though most of us raise our own meat, I know for a fact there are several vegetarians that post regularly. I do often wonder, though, why vegetarians have to eat stuff that is made to look and taste like animal products? Tofurkey? Vegeburgers? Soy milk?


There is a small, sadistic part of my brain that would love to set a bunch of PeTA-ites loose - naked and unarmed - in the middle of somewhere remote. They want nature to be as it was intended? Go for it. I bet the fittest would not be surviving on nuts and berries.

Mary

I think being a vegetarian is silly because humans are biologically speaking omnivores. That doesn't mean I have a problem with people doing it or harass them or anything, just that I think it's silly.

I honestly don't understand all all how you can be for animal welfare and rights at the same time. They're opposite stances, one for the humane use and management of animals, the other for the end of all animal use no matter how benevolent, the end of any kind of management even though it is necessary (You'd have to kiss all endangered and domestic species goodbye).

But you see Animal rights want to put animals on the same level as humans.
we are animals as well, they like to point out and that we are all the same. soo eating them would be being a cannibal.

yes it is murder if we are all the same. and to raise and eat them would be aforethought.

as far as I know all of us here are for the good treatment and welfare of animals no matter if we eat them, use their honey,wool, eggs or just enjoy having them around. all these things that PeTA wants to stop.

__________________
He who thinks he knows, doesn't. He who knows he doesn't know, knows.~ Joseph Campbell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeMrK...AE7062ADE5A19C

I think your comment may have shed some light on some of the confusion. I am not saying we need to give animals the same rights as humans. If this is what others have been by the term "animals rights", then I can see the misunderstanding. I do not, for example, think we need to give animals the right to vote or own property, etc. I do support animal rights, however, not just animal welfare. I may read up on those 2 people you've suggested, but even if I disagree completely with what they stand for I can't imagine it will change my views regarding animal rights. Their view of what animals rights means may just be very different than mine.

As a follow-up, after reading the comments that came through while I was posting that last message it is clear that there is a difference in terminology here. Hopefully my previous post clears up my stance somewhat. I couldn't care less what PETA thinks of as animal rights. They don't get to define the term.

Animal Rights - rights (as to fair and humane treatment) regarded as belonging fundamentally to all animals
Humanely - marked by compassion, sympathy, or consideration for humans or animals

Just for kicks I looked up the actual definition of animal rights, then the term humanely as well, lest it be confused with treating like a human.

as to fair and humane treatment

that would be welfare

ANIMAL WELFARE

Animal Welfare, as defined by the American Veterinary Medical Association, is a human responsibility that encompasses all aspects of animal well-being, including proper housing, management, disease prevention and treatment, responsible care, humane handling, and, when necessary, humane euthansia


Animal rights is the belief that animals have an intrinsic value separate from any value they have to humans, and are worthy of moral consideration. They have a right to be free of oppression, confinement, use and abuse by humans.
http://animalrights.about.com/od/ani...asicTenets.htm

__________________
He who thinks he knows, doesn't. He who knows he doesn't know, knows.~ Joseph Campbell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeMrK...AE7062ADE5A19C

Like I said, it sounds like a difference in terminology. The definition I gave cam from the Merriam-Websters Dictionary. The definition you gave came from a specific group that is defining their view on the topic. My view of animal rights goes beyond the animal welfare you gave from the AVMA.

Based on the definitions you gave, however, if I had to pick one I would agree that I'm more of a supporter of animal welfare. Although in reality my view is somewhat of a mixture between those definitions of animal welfare and animal rights.

And so goes The Animal Rights folks. They are NO better then Peta and most belong to peta.
Booooooo

Lots of interesting discussions and arguments here, lots to learn. The snarkiness is pure entertainment, though. What turns me off is watching it turn to ad hominem attacks.

Me? I believe that treating animals badly is wrong, but raising them for food (or other products) is not.

__________________
The garden's getting bigger this year. Again.

to Jonathan

ok, what rights, by law, would you give animals?

__________________
He who thinks he knows, doesn't. He who knows he doesn't know, knows.~ Joseph Campbell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeMrK...AE7062ADE5A19C

PeTA IS an animal rights group. they don't hide the fact.

__________________
He who thinks he knows, doesn't. He who knows he doesn't know, knows.~ Joseph Campbell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeMrK...AE7062ADE5A19C

"ok, what rights, by law, would you give animals?"

I'm not one for creating more laws. So if your definition of animals rights involves granting legal rights, then again I can see why we had the confusion on terminology.

From the definition you gave earlier of animal rights, I very much agree with this statement, though "Animal rights is the belief that animals have an intrinsic value separate from any value they have to humans, and are worthy of moral consideration." Although the phrase "moral consideration" could be ambiguous, and differences in what we think that phrase means could have a significant impact on the meaning of the rest of that statement. I could just remove that part of the statement to make things easier, and say that I agree with this statement "Animal rights is the belief that animals have an intrinsic value separate from any value they have to humans..."

Maybe this is an arument of semantics. Maybe there are technical definitions that would clarify animal rights vs animal welfare. However, I'm not going to bother going there. Please allow me to explain.

In the US we as human have intrinsic rights, also called God given rights. Many people mistakenly call them constitutional rights, however that implies that they are given to us by the constitution, which is a mistaken belief. Our rights come from within, and exist because we are human. We have these rights whether we live in a mansion, or under a park bridge. Our rights are not tied to our welfare.

On the other hand my animals exist at MY pleasure. I OWN them. I feed them. I am responsible for them. I am responsible for their welfare and their safety, and their comfort. And when the appropriate time comes I will be responsible for their death. I will then gain sustenance from their bodies. I am responsible for treating my animals humanely and giving them a good life until their time is done. I take comfort in keeping my animals comfortable and not stressed until their end.

I would strongly argue that animals do not have "rights" for with rights come responsibilities. My animals have no responsibility. Animals rights laws do not impact the animals, they impact the human caretakers. You could argue that the human has rights and responsibilities pertaining to the keeping of animals, but you can't attribute these rights to the animals.

__________________
The government can't give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
--Dr. Adrian Rogers

I have friends who are vegetarian. In fact my wife and I believe it is healthy to eat vegetarian a couple days each week. As time goes on we continue to make meat more of a side dish, and not the main course. Again, for our health! We have no self-rightous beliefs about eating animals. Most of the meat we eat we raise ourselves. This way we control what they eat, and how they live. But I don't get up on my high horse and preach about it.

I have nothing whatsoever against vegetarians, except the ones who can't resist the urge to tell me how holy they are, and how terrible I am. Them's the ones I have a problem with. But, you're not one of them, Raven. Are you?

__________________
The government can't give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
--Dr. Adrian Rogers

Hmmm...is that where YOU got your info on the bullies here you spoke of earlier?

__________________
My book is out! Go 'like' it on FB:
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Goo...83553391747680

sorry I may not understand you fully (i am blond) but if I do understand correctly, you feel respect and some guilt for the use of another life to continue your own?
all peoples though out time have felt this guilt that is way there was myth and rituals in every cultures.
like the buffalo dance
http://www.firstpeople.us/FP-Html-Le...Blackfoot.html
or the Nivkh Bear Festivals.

I feel the problem today is that most people are so removed from their food that they no long feel the reverence. they just go and get it from the store.
they have lost the real view and reality of what it is to be part of this world and with nature.

__________________
He who thinks he knows, doesn't. He who knows he doesn't know, knows.~ Joseph Campbell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeMrK...AE7062ADE5A19C

That was great, HomeHarvest!

__________________
My book is out! Go 'like' it on FB:
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Goo...83553391747680